39 wins and 33 losses and their offense if unguardable? That is pure hyperbole and you lost a lot of credibility with that statement.

So you take my sentence that only referred to Miami's offense post All Star break (specifically with K.O. on the floor), cut it in half and then go on to talk about Miami's season record.....and my credibility is shot?

For comparison the 113.2 +9.6 1.90 12.3 57.6 61.0 team with the best number in theleague this year

Miami is doing this in the half court and playing at a super slow pace of 96.14, they are not turning the ball over and they are shooting the eyes out of it as nearly every shot is a layup or a wide open 3. They still are struggling mightily as they have all year to score when K.O. is not on the floor.

I would expect them to be less successful the next couple games against OKC and Indiana as Adams and Turner should be more successful defending them than Jokic, Plumlee, Kanter and O'Quinn were the last couple games. They may very well destroy OKC's and Indiana's benches though.

Stats after the allstar break are suspect and probably more so this year. For the season, there are 5 teams with 110 or higher offensive ratings. Since the allstar break, there are 12 teams with 110 or higher offensive ratings. As an example, the Sixers overall offensive rating is 106.7 but after the all-star break it is 111.1. I don't think teams learned how to play that much better offense over the allstar break.

All these bad teams tanking are distorting the numbers. For the full season, only the Suns' defense rating is over 110. After the allstar break, 9 teams have defensive ratings over 110. Not only are the bad teams playing worse defense but so are the good teams. Once you're up by 20+ points it is natural to let up on defense. Plus there is a lot more garbage time.

I guess the way I look at it is that the offense is on an arc improving throughout the season.

For example, if a season were 10 games, and they scored 95, 95, 97, 97, and 98 in pre-all-star games, their rating would be 96.4. If they continued that same trend offensively and scored 98, 98, 100, 100, and 102, their rating post-all star would be 99.6.

You could say, "There is not way they improved that much just because of the all-star break," but if they are improving their offense throughout the year, it's not so much the all-star break that make them improve, but the gradual growth throughout the year.

Huh? I quote actual stats and you make up numbers. The Heats' offensive ratings per month are:

Oct 103.0 Nov 99.8 Dec 106.6Jan 102.1 Feb 105.8Mar 112.0

There's no improvement arc. There's a huge jump in March when the bad teams really started tanking.

39 wins and 33 losses and their offense if unguardable? That is pure hyperbole and you lost a lot of credibility with that statement.

So you take my sentence that only referred to Miami's offense post All Star break (specifically with K.O. on the floor), cut it in half and then go on to talk about Miami's season record.....and my credibility is shot?

For comparison the 113.2 +9.6 1.90 12.3 57.6 61.0 team with the best number in theleague this year

Miami is doing this in the half court and playing at a super slow pace of 96.14, they are not turning the ball over and they are shooting the eyes out of it as nearly every shot is a layup or a wide open 3. They still are struggling mightily as they have all year to score when K.O. is not on the floor.

I would expect them to be less successful the next couple games against OKC and Indiana as Adams and Turner should be more successful defending them than Jokic, Plumlee, Kanter and O'Quinn were the last couple games. They may very well destroy OKC's and Indiana's benches though.

Well played, sir.

Good to see you back here. Not many have both your feel for the game and at the same time a grasp of meaningful stats. And I really enjoy your provocations, like this one.

If I were the Heat, I’d trade Whiteside. Their best lineups have Olynyk with either Adebayo or James Johnson. They’ve probably got as much ball- and man-movement per possession as any team in the league, and Whiteside is a poor fit for that, while Olynyk, Johnson, (and it looks like) Adebayo, are beautifully suited to it.

Not to mention his salary - 22 million this year. Something has to give if they’re going to take the next step.

Miami are not trading Whiteside. Unless there are personal problems, that is just not happening

He is fairly reasonable at 22mill, given what he brings

I made two points about Whiteside: 1) that their overall effectiveness is (much) higher when his less-well-paid teammates are on the floor; and 2) that he doesn’t fit the way they play offense, with their high-velocity movement and everyone touching the ball. You haven’t really answered those points.

I made the further point that they are stuck in a salary-cap bind, and if they’re going to take the next step they’ll have to move some contracts.

So something has to give, and it makes sense that Hassan is the one to give.

You’re right to point to his assets; he’s an amazing rebounder on both boards, and an outstanding shotblocker. Maybe he’d have a more positive impact on his team’s success if his coach re-designed the offense and the defense to accommodate his weaknesses. But in fact Spoelstra has made the offense, at least, less well suited to Whiteside’s game this season (and, not incidentally, better suited to Olynyk’s).

Most problematic, he’s only gotten the seventh-most minutes, per game, on the team, even as he’s being paid like a star.

Why does it make sense that Whiteside is the one to give? He is the team's 3rd leading scorer, leading rebounder, leading shot blocker and best defensive player. He has the team's lowest defensive rating by far. Of the rotation players, he has the highest differential between Ortg and Drtg. He has by far the most WS/48 on the team. By far the best PER on the team. By far the highest Simple Rating on 82games.com.

You’re pointing to some undeniable talents. I’d as soon throw out Ortg and Drtg, since they’re so corrupted by the productivity of other players on the floor - but you make a good case for his value.

I have two responses: 1) Of course he has value - that is why he can be traded, despite his salary. As I pointed out above, he’s only getting the seventh-most minutes on his team. Despite the eye-popping numbers, his coach still won’t give him consistent starter-level minutes.

2) It’s still a team game, and the team’s results are not so impressive with him on the floor. See below. I’d also go back to the point about their offense that I’ve been making above - he’s not suited to the ball-movement offense they’re running.

The Heat are in a bad shape financially because of contracts like those given to Tyler Johnson, Josh Richardson, Dion Waiters and James Johnson. Not sure any of those guys are worth over the MLE but they will be making close to $57 million between them next year. That's where things need to be addressed.

I’d certainly agree about Dion Waiters, but maybe not Richardson and James Johnson. Regarding Tyler: he is a key rotation player - but I would agree with you, because his contract is way out of proportion, at least starting next year.

Of Miami‘s top 20 most often-used lineups, these are the ones that have a plus difference between offense and defense of at least .15 points. Richardson, Ellington, and Olynyk are each in five of the six; James Johnson is in four; while Whiteside and Waiters are in one each.

The left-hand number is the rank of each lineup by minutes played on the season; followed by the five man lineup; followed by the total of minutes; followed by the offensive effectiveness; followed by the defensive effectiveness, per possession.

They’ve had better defensive lineups - including one with Whiteside - but the defense that those lineups generate does not make up for the weaker offense.

39 wins and 33 losses and their offense if unguardable? That is pure hyperbole and you lost a lot of credibility with that statement.

So you take my sentence that only referred to Miami's offense post All Star break (specifically with K.O. on the floor), cut it in half and then go on to talk about Miami's season record.....and my credibility is shot?

For comparison the 113.2 +9.6 1.90 12.3 57.6 61.0 team with the best number in theleague this year

Miami is doing this in the half court and playing at a super slow pace of 96.14, they are not turning the ball over and they are shooting the eyes out of it as nearly every shot is a layup or a wide open 3. They still are struggling mightily as they have all year to score when K.O. is not on the floor.

I would expect them to be less successful the next couple games against OKC and Indiana as Adams and Turner should be more successful defending them than Jokic, Plumlee, Kanter and O'Quinn were the last couple games. They may very well destroy OKC's and Indiana's benches though.

Stats after the allstar break are suspect and probably more so this year. For the season, there are 5 teams with 110 or higher offensive ratings. Since the allstar break, there are 12 teams with 110 or higher offensive ratings. As an example, the Sixers overall offensive rating is 106.7 but after the all-star break it is 111.1. I don't think teams learned how to play that much better offense over the allstar break.

All these bad teams tanking are distorting the numbers. For the full season, only the Suns' defense rating is over 110. After the allstar break, 9 teams have defensive ratings over 110. Not only are the bad teams playing worse defense but so are the good teams. Once you're up by 20+ points it is natural to let up on defense. Plus there is a lot more garbage time.

I guess the way I look at it is that the offense is on an arc improving throughout the season.

For example, if a season were 10 games, and they scored 95, 95, 97, 97, and 98 in pre-all-star games, their rating would be 96.4. If they continued that same trend offensively and scored 98, 98, 100, 100, and 102, their rating post-all star would be 99.6.

You could say, "There is not way they improved that much just because of the all-star break," but if they are improving their offense throughout the year, it's not so much the all-star break that make them improve, but the gradual growth throughout the year.

Huh? I quote actual stats and you make up numbers. The Heats' offensive ratings per month are:

Oct 103.0 Nov 99.8 Dec 106.6Jan 102.1 Feb 105.8Mar 112.0

There's no improvement arc. There's a huge jump in March when the bad teams really started tanking.

.

In March so far they’ve played two teams that are plausibly tanking - Phoenix and Sac. That’s out of 12 games. I’m not making any grand point, and I could imagine other reasons why offensive ratings would go up, including injuries.

Previous game against Denver was even better, 30 pts., 8 reb., 6 ass., 4 blocks, 1 steal and was +18 in that double O.T. thriller on Monday. Spoelstra has figured out how to use K.O. in a matter of months, Stevens had 4 years and spent them all with K.O. under his thumb. Miami's offense has looked virtually unguardable with K.O. on the floor since the All Star break with a 123.4 offensive rating and a +19.1 net rating in 302 minutes.

KO's season stat line is almost identical to last season.

If you want to cherry pick ...sure .... I guess we can make Rozier look better than Chris Paul

On the whole, better, and no need to cherrypick (not that there ever is!).

Significantly above his best previous season for PER - 17.5 is very nice indeed. Best season so far for TS%, Defensive Reb%, Assist%, Usage, and FTRate.

The turnover rate is also up, dragging down his PER. He’s doing more with the ball, and his role has significantly expanded from his time in Boston.

He’s among the league leaders for taking charges, but that was true in Boston as well (those who still want to claim that he’s soft might want to contemplate what it’s like to do that).

Significantly above his best previous season for PER - 17.5 is very nice indeed. Best season so far for TS%, Defensive Reb%, Assist%, Usage, and FTRate.

This is misleading and you know it.

His PER of 17.5 is "significantly" better than his previous high of 16.3? "Significantly better would be like Terry Rozier going from 10.9 to 14.9. Going from 16.3 to 17.5 is not significant.

Also best season TS% of 61.1% as compared to previous best of 60.3% is no big deal. Neither is Def Rbd% going from 20.7 to 21.4 or Usage% going from 21.1 to 21.3 or FT% going from 25.8 to 27.8.

That's minimally better at best. Basically you look at these advanced numbers and some others like WS/48, his Ortg and Drtg, his Per36 stats and his counting stats and KO is basically the same exact player.

His PER of 17.5 is "significantly" better than his previous high of 16.3? "Significantly better would be like Terry Rozier going from 10.9 to 14.9. Going from 16.3 to 17.5 is not significant.

At 17.5 he’s 94th in the league. At 16.3, Ed Davis is 132nd in the league this season. That’s about 40% better, so, yes, I’d call it significant. Remember that PER sets league average at 15. The bell curve has a gentle slope in that area.

I wasn’t trying to make any big deal out of what I was saying, not trying to make Olynyk out to be something he’s not, not even taking a position on the “same stat line as last year” argument. “Stat line” refers to a box score, and PER is a pretty good summary of what you can find in the box score.

For what it’s worth, I also don’t place any high value on PER, because of all the actual basketball that it leaves out.

His PER of 17.5 is "significantly" better than his previous high of 16.3? "Significantly better would be like Terry Rozier going from 10.9 to 14.9. Going from 16.3 to 17.5 is not significant.

At 17.5 he’s 94th in the league. At 16.3, Ed Davis is 132nd in the league this season. That’s about 40% better, so, yes, I’d call it significant. Remember that PER sets league average at 15. The bell curve has a gentle slope in that area.

I wasn’t trying to make any big deal out of what I was saying, not trying to make Olynyk out to be something he’s not, not even taking a position on the “same stat line as last year” argument. “Stat line” refers to a box score, and PER is a pretty good summary of what you can find in the box score.

For what it’s worth, I also don’t place any high value on PER, because of all the actual basketball that it leaves out.

Not personal just calling you out on a misleading statement. You mentioned there was no need to cherrypick stats to show Olynyk was a much better player, like the Oracle was suggesting, because Olynyk was having a career season in a variety of stats. But those stats showed absolute minimal growth in his game. That's misleading and given your reliance on stats in your stances, I think you know its misleading.

Have nothing personal against you. Made no comment about you personally. Meant nothing by it. If you're hurt by what I said, I apologize, didn't mean anything by what I said. Just figured given your statistical knowledge that by saying Olynyk was having some career year in certain stats but also knowing that the increase in those numbers was tiny, you would know you were being misleading.

His PER of 17.5 is "significantly" better than his previous high of 16.3? "Significantly better would be like Terry Rozier going from 10.9 to 14.9. Going from 16.3 to 17.5 is not significant.

At 17.5 he’s 94th in the league. At 16.3, Ed Davis is 132nd in the league this season. That’s about 40% better, so, yes, I’d call it significant. Remember that PER sets league average at 15. The bell curve has a gentle slope in that area.

I wasn’t trying to make any big deal out of what I was saying, not trying to make Olynyk out to be something he’s not, not even taking a position on the “same stat line as last year” argument. “Stat line” refers to a box score, and PER is a pretty good summary of what you can find in the box score.

For what it’s worth, I also don’t place any high value on PER, because of all the actual basketball that it leaves out.

Not personal just calling you out on a misleading statement. You mentioned there was no need to cherrypick stats to show Olynyk was a much better player, like the Oracle was suggesting, because Olynyk was having a career season in a variety of stats. But those stats showed absolute minimal growth in his game. That's misleading and given your reliance on stats in your stances, I think you know its misleading.

Have nothing personal against you. Made no comment about you personally. Meant nothing by it. If you're hurt by what I said, I apologize, didn't mean anything by what I said. Just figured given your statistical knowledge that by saying Olynyk was having some career year in certain stats but also knowing that the increase in those numbers was tiny, you would know you were being misleading.

I explained why the jump in PER is not only significant but substantial. You have still not responded to that; and in fact you have doubled down on saying that I am not merely wrong but deceptive - and then, astonishingly, repeat several times that your comment isn’t “personal”.

I don’t hold it against anyone to be math-challenged or to not understand how PER works. If it were apples or free-throw attempts or something, 16.3 is not very different from 17.5 - after all. Perfectly understandable.

For someone to claim that I am being deliberately misleading has a simple solution – I can just stop interacting with them. But you are a moderator on this site. I have been coming here looking for serious discussion about basketball at the highest level and about the greatest franchise. It seems that I have come to the wrong place.

His PER of 17.5 is "significantly" better than his previous high of 16.3? "Significantly better would be like Terry Rozier going from 10.9 to 14.9. Going from 16.3 to 17.5 is not significant.

At 17.5 he’s 94th in the league. At 16.3, Ed Davis is 132nd in the league this season. That’s about 40% better, so, yes, I’d call it significant. Remember that PER sets league average at 15. The bell curve has a gentle slope in that area.

I wasn’t trying to make any big deal out of what I was saying, not trying to make Olynyk out to be something he’s not, not even taking a position on the “same stat line as last year” argument. “Stat line” refers to a box score, and PER is a pretty good summary of what you can find in the box score.

For what it’s worth, I also don’t place any high value on PER, because of all the actual basketball that it leaves out.

Not personal just calling you out on a misleading statement. You mentioned there was no need to cherrypick stats to show Olynyk was a much better player, like the Oracle was suggesting, because Olynyk was having a career season in a variety of stats. But those stats showed absolute minimal growth in his game. That's misleading and given your reliance on stats in your stances, I think you know its misleading.

Have nothing personal against you. Made no comment about you personally. Meant nothing by it. If you're hurt by what I said, I apologize, didn't mean anything by what I said. Just figured given your statistical knowledge that by saying Olynyk was having some career year in certain stats but also knowing that the increase in those numbers was tiny, you would know you were being misleading.

I explained why the jump in PER is not only significant but substantial. You have still not responded to that; and in fact you have doubled down on saying that I am not merely wrong but deceptive. I don’t hold it against anyone to be math-challenged or to not understand how PER works. If it were apples or free-throw attempts or something, 16.3 is not very different from 17.5 - after all. Perfectly understandable.

For someone to claim that I am being deliberately misleading has a simple solution – I can just stop interacting with them. But you are a moderator on this site. I have been coming here looking for serious discussion about basketball at the highest level and about the greatest franchise. It seems that I have come to the wrong place.

You seem to fail to mention all the other stats you mentioned. I am taking the totality of the stats you mentioned when discussing the minimal amount of increase in his stats. You seem to have forgotten those stats. Take the nearly nonexistent increase in those stats and couple it with a decent but certainly not significant increase in PER and you get a total minimal increase in stats.

By the way, I am far from mathematically challenged. I gave you an example of my opinion of a significant increase in PER. The 4 point jump at that end of the bell curve is significant. I don't find your definition at the middle of the bell curve to be as much. Maybe that'd just a difference of opinion of what significant means.

His PER of 17.5 is "significantly" better than his previous high of 16.3? "Significantly better would be like Terry Rozier going from 10.9 to 14.9. Going from 16.3 to 17.5 is not significant.

At 17.5 he’s 94th in the league. At 16.3, Ed Davis is 132nd in the league this season. That’s about 40% better, so, yes, I’d call it significant. Remember that PER sets league average at 15. The bell curve has a gentle slope in that area.

I wasn’t trying to make any big deal out of what I was saying, not trying to make Olynyk out to be something he’s not, not even taking a position on the “same stat line as last year” argument. “Stat line” refers to a box score, and PER is a pretty good summary of what you can find in the box score.

For what it’s worth, I also don’t place any high value on PER, because of all the actual basketball that it leaves out.

Not personal just calling you out on a misleading statement. You mentioned there was no need to cherrypick stats to show Olynyk was a much better player, like the Oracle was suggesting, because Olynyk was having a career season in a variety of stats. But those stats showed absolute minimal growth in his game. That's misleading and given your reliance on stats in your stances, I think you know its misleading.

Have nothing personal against you. Made no comment about you personally. Meant nothing by it. If you're hurt by what I said, I apologize, didn't mean anything by what I said. Just figured given your statistical knowledge that by saying Olynyk was having some career year in certain stats but also knowing that the increase in those numbers was tiny, you would know you were being misleading.

I explained why the jump in PER is not only significant but substantial. You have still not responded to that; and in fact you have doubled down on saying that I am not merely wrong but deceptive - and then, astonishingly, repeat several times that your comment isn’t “personal”.

I don’t hold it against anyone to be math-challenged or to not understand how PER works. If it were apples or free-throw attempts or something, 16.3 is not very different from 17.5 - after all. Perfectly understandable.

For someone to claim that I am being deliberately misleading has a simple solution – I can just stop interacting with them. But you are a moderator on this site. I have been coming here looking for serious discussion about basketball at the highest level and about the greatest franchise. It seems that I have come to the wrong place.

Hey man, I urge you to reconsider that this is not the place you’re looking for, coming from a poster who at times has to backtrack from statements made during debates here.

I think you add quality to the board here and a unique view. Nick in my experience is a good guy here and not to speak for him, but I think he in part responded that way because you are a poster that probably has higher expectations in terms of post quality. Maybe you guys can PM it out.

Logged

Give us this pick, Almighty RedAnd forgive us our tankingAs we forgive those who tanked against usAnd lead us not into the lotteryBut deliver us from losing